نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استاد. فقه و حقوق. دانشگاه مازندران، مازندارن، ایران
2 فقه دانشکده الهیات. دانشگاه مازندران.
3 فقه دانشگاه مازندران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Parliamentary obstruction, as one of the tools available to parliamentary minorities for exerting influence over and affecting the legislative process, has always occupied a boundary between the legitimate right to protest and institutionalized obstructionism. This political-legal practice, which takes the form of lawful actions intended to delay, modify, or halt bills and legislative proposals, raises fundamental questions concerning the limits and scope of its legitimacy not only in democratic systems but also in political structures based on Islamic governance. In the Islamic Republic of Iran, where parliamentary representation simultaneously entails representing the people, acting as their legal agent, and fulfilling a religious trust (amanah), the issue of parliamentary obstruction becomes more complex. On the one hand, the Constitution and the internal regulations of the Parliament provide a framework for political protest and minority oversight; on the other hand, the necessity of preserving the integrity of the political system, safeguarding the public interest, and complying with Islamic principles challenges any disruptive action. This tension makes it increasingly necessary to formulate a coherent framework capable of recognizing the right to parliamentary oversight while preventing the abuse of legal mechanisms. Moving beyond a purely descriptive approach, this article seeks to provide a structured analysis of parliamentary obstruction at three levels: Iran’s political history, jurisprudential foundations, and the existing legal system. The central research question is: Based on the teachings of Imamiya jurisprudence and the enacted laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran, how should the limits of the legitimacy of parliamentary obstruction be defined, and is it possible to propose a graduated model for assessing its degree of legitimacy? To answer this question, the study employs a descriptive-analytical methodology and draws on library sources, parliamentary documents, and jurisprudential opinions. It is organized into four sections. The first examines the historical roots of this phenomenon in Iran; the second analyzes the jurisprudential arguments supporting and restricting its legitimacy; the third examines the legal status of parliamentary obstruction under existing legislation and the Parliament’s internal regulations; and finally, the fourth section integrates the preceding findings and proposes the theory of graduated legitimacy as a framework for determining the limits of legitimate parliamentary obstruction.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)